BREAKING SEC Going to 9 Conference Games

[denver]

I may have missed it in the 3 pages...but will SOS now be taken into account when evaluating CFP places? If not, then this move is potentially self-harming for the SEC. For some reason I don't see the B10 getting any scrutiny for their OOC scheduling..yet both UM and OSU had ZERO P4 OOC games in their championship run. And chirpy IU's next 5 years OOC schedule is a joke..making the SEC play 9 in conference games AND a P4 OOC game seems to be allowing the weak B10 to gain more CFP places by playing their weak in conference teams to me....but hey, maybe I have missed something in all the noise. It happens! lol

 

[bamajas]

I may have missed it in the 3 pages...but will SOS now be taken into account when evaluating CFP places? If not, then this move is potentially self-harming for the SEC. For some reason I don't see the B10 getting any scrutiny for their OOC scheduling..yet both UM and OSU had ZERO P4 OOC games in their championship run. And chirpy IU's next 5 years OOC schedule is a joke..making the SEC play 9 in conference games AND a P4 OOC game seems to be allowing the weak B10 to gain more CFP places by playing their weak in conference teams to me....but hey, maybe I have missed something in all the noise. It happens! lol

Yes, that news broke earlier in the week. Not a coincidence. SEC wasn't going to 9 without it

 

[denver]

Yes, that news broke earlier in the week. Not a coincidence. SEC wasn't going to 9 without it

Thanks...although I still have reservations if that is still the same jokers who do the AP rankings etc lol

 

[81usaf92]

I think the idea the Big Ten had anything to do with this (as some suggest) is....well, when is the last time this even happened?

Sankey added Texas and Oklahoma, forcing everybody's hand. MY SUSPICION - and I'll admit I may be wrong - is that the bowl games will be going by the wayside due to all of the portal movement, sit outs, and oversaturation combined with more games being part of the playoff and (probably) a rapid expansion to a 16-team playoff.

In other words, I think Sankey probably had a "come to Jesus" meeting with the Vandys and Mississippi States of the world, the ones who were clinging to "4 out of conference cupcakes, go 2-6 in the SEC, go to Shreveport" model, and telling them it's going away quick and there's more money to be made from "GAME NINE" in the TV contract than from the nonexistent bowl game.

And as has been noted by a few folks, the SEC Championship game is heading to the ash bin of history. The inclusion of a bunch of losers of conference title games in the name of "not punishing success" combined with everyone being able to see "you know, this game is meaningless" is going to force everyone's hand.

Also, your point is dead on. FOR YEARS more posters than not have whined about "I wish we wouldn't play FIU/UTC/Mercer/Citadel because injuries" and now the replacement arrives and they don't like that either.


Remember all the "I miss the days when we had the home-and-home with Penn State even when we lost" people?

They didn't miss it nearly as much as they think they did if they're complaining now.

The SECCG is more of a question than bowls. I think major bowls will survive and be the playoff sites. As for the SECCG… I think there is way to much money wrapped into a huge game to really think it’s going to be gone over this.

 

[81usaf92]

IMO, you over-generalize. Some have complained, while others never have. I don’t know that anyone has violated their previous stance. But I don’t have a good enough memory to know who has said what, so maybe a few have. Frankly, most who read never have said a word either way.

No I really don’t over generalize Alabama fans. They are exactly like every other fan base in that they are highly hypocritical when it comes to matters that affect them. I could do the Selma thing and show you loads of evidence to support my accusation but I honestly don’t feel like digging it up because I have too much to do with work. But Alabama fans have complained about bad opponents like they have been extremely wishy washy on SOS when it suits them.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

The SECCG is more of a question than bowls. I think major bowls will survive and be the playoff sites. As for the SECCG… I think there is way to much money wrapped into a huge game to really think it’s going to be gone over this.

Perhaps I should’ve clarified, but I was mostly being lazy.

Obviously, the major bowl games with the big payouts will continue to exist, even if they become bowls in name only (BINOs?) as part of the process of determining the champion. I was thinking more of the bowls the host all of those 6-6 teams. Those are why the riff raff of the SEC most years like Kentucky, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt, and even at some points Ole Miss. Plus, Arkansas have always opposed that extra game. For them it was the difference between perhaps a coach keeping his job and being forced out.

I understand the SEC title game has brought in a lot of money in the past, but I honestly question how much it will bring in when it is a little more than a game where the two teams will both be going to the playoff anyway. If we begin having a series of rematches that does a little more than determine seeding, will the fans still buy tickets and will they still watch on television?

 

[Power Eye]

Perhaps I should’ve clarified, but I was mostly being lazy.

Obviously, the major bowl games with the big payouts will continue to exist, even if they become bowls in name, only as part of the process of determining the champion. I was thinking more of the bowls the host all of those 6-6 teams. Those are why the riff raff of the SEC most years like Kentucky, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt, and even at some points Ole Miss. Plus, Arkansas have always opposed that extra game. For them it was the difference between perhaps a coach keeping his job and being forced out.

I understand the SEC title game has brought in a lot of money in the past, but I honestly question how much it will bring in when it is a little more than a game where the two teams will both be going to the playoff anyway. If we begin having a series of rematches that does a little more than determine seeding, will the fans still buy tickets and will they still watch on television?

The thought of the SECCG going away bothers me. I love that game and care about winning the SEC. I know I’m probably in the minority on this, but I can’t stand the idea of going back to the pre-SECCG days where there were co-champs. I recognize that tie breakers exist now to determine who goes to the game, but at least the champ is settled on the field.

 

[Windsortide]

How many small school programs are going to disappear now that there will be fewer opportunities to make money by being the sacrificial cupcake for non conference SEC games?

That was my initial thought.

 

[DzynKingRTR]

How many small school programs are going to disappear now that there will be fewer opportunities to make money by being the sacrificial cupcake for non conference SEC games?

HBCU schools may go away or large schools will be required to play those to keep it from happening.

 

[BamaFossil]

Mark it

The Sec Championship game is going away! Heard it here first

That's good! The SECCG just adds a loss to one of the top SEC teams, thus lowering that team's position in the CFP. Plus the increased potential for injuries that jeopardize a team's playoff chances. With a 9-team conference schedule and a 12-team playoff, the sooner the SECCG bites the dust, the better!

 

[Crimson1967]

How many small school programs are going to disappear now that there will be fewer opportunities to make money by being the sacrificial cupcake for non conference SEC games?

With the P4 game and the FCS game that leaves just one game open for G6 schools to cash in on SEC and Big Ten body bag games. That’s 34 games with CUSA, the Sun Belt, the American, and the MAC all begging for a call.

 

[BamaMoon]

Perhaps I should’ve clarified, but I was mostly being lazy.

Obviously, the major bowl games with the big payouts will continue to exist, even if they become bowls in name only (BINOs?) as part of the process of determining the champion. I was thinking more of the bowls the host all of those 6-6 teams. Those are why the riff raff of the SEC most years like Kentucky, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt, and even at some points Ole Miss. Plus, Arkansas have always opposed that extra game. For them it was the difference between perhaps a coach keeping his job and being forced out.

I understand the SEC title game has brought in a lot of money in the past, but I honestly question how much it will bring in when it is a little more than a game where the two teams will both be going to the playoff anyway. If we begin having a series of rematches that does a little more than determine seeding, will the fans still buy tickets and will they still watch on television?

The thought of the SECCG going away bothers me. I love that game and care about winning the SEC. I know I’m probably in the minority on this, but I can’t stand the idea of going back to the pre-SECCG days where there were co-champs. I recognize that tie breakers exist now to determine who goes to the game, but at least the champ is settled on the field.

That's good! The SECCG just adds a loss to one of the top SEC teams, thus lowering that team's position in the CFP. Plus the increased potential for injuries that jeopardize a team's playoff chances. With a 9-team conference schedule and a 12-team playoff, the sooner the SECCG bites the dust, the better!

I LOVED the SECCG for all of these years, but adding the 9th SEC game, adding more games to the playoff (as it stands currently) and I think the game will eventually go away too.

I don't like the thought of it because Bama has more appearances and it's helped us far more times than it hurt us, but I can see us going back to titles being determined from the SEC standings. Yes, there might be split years and sometimes it could work out with 3 teams sharing (I'm supposing, but have not worked that out mathematically)

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I don't like the thought of it because Bama has more appearances and it's helped us far more times than it hurt us, but I can see us going back to titles being determined from the SEC standings. Yes, there might be split years and sometimes it could work out with 3 teams sharing (I'm supposing, but have not worked that out mathematically)

In all honesty, the SEC championship has hurt - AT MOST - 2 teams as far as national titles go:
1994 Alabama
2001 Tennessee

And I've always been thankful that we lost in 1994 simply because the polls were going to hose us anyway, what with all the love affair of "Tom Osborne is the best coach who hasn't won a national title and he does it right" jibberish. Losing to Florida was FAR LESS painful than if we had beaten them, beaten FSU - and then had to watch as Nebraska was voted the champion.

The SEC might have to close off the game simply because "well, we might cost ourselves millions more by eliminating a borderline contender who draws".....looking right at you, Texas and Alabama.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

With the P4 game and the FCS game that leaves just one game open for G6 schools to cash in on SEC and Big Ten body bag games. That’s 34 games with CUSA, the Sun Belt, the American, and the MAC all begging for a call.

"Alabama shouldn't be playing Mercer."

Mercer no longer gets that big check. School closes.

"Why couldn't the SEC schools help a brother out with a ballgame here and there?"

Trust me, the very same Southern schools being lambasted for playing these teams will all suddenly be blamed for not keeping them afloat.

 

[BamaMoon]

In all honesty, the SEC championship has hurt - AT MOST - 2 teams as far as national titles go:
1994 Alabama
2001 Tennessee

And I've always been thankful that we lost in 1994 simply because the polls were going to hose us anyway, what with all the love affair of "Tom Osborne is the best coach who hasn't won a national title and he does it right" jibberish. Losing to Florida was FAR LESS painful than if we had beaten them, beaten FSU - and then had to watch as Nebraska was voted the champion.

The SEC might have to close off the game simply because "well, we might cost ourselves millions more by eliminating a borderline contender who draws".....looking right at you, Texas and Alabama.

If it happened to Texas we'd roll in the floor laughing.

But it could be us the next time too!

 

[tusks_n_raider]

I don’t really want the SECCG to go away either.

We were off to a rocky relationship with it after ‘92 as FLA kept beating us through the early-mid 90s

But starting with the ‘09 win we’ve won the game 9 straight times that we’ve appeared.

But at some point it will knock a borderline team out.

My stance is don’t be borderline to begin with.

If you are 10-2 or 9-3 going in you better win and if you don’t then you shouldn’t have lost those other 2-3 games.

 

[saturdaysarebet]

Not complete but initial thoughts…


Alabama - Auburn, Tennessee, Miss State
Arkansas - Texas, Missouri, Oklahoma
Auburn - Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi
Florida - Georgia, LSU, Kentucky
Georgia - Florida, Auburn, South Carolina
Kentucky - Tennessee, Florida, Vanderbilt
LSU - Mississippi, Florida, Texas A&M
Mississippi - Miss State, Auburn
Miss State - Mississippi, Alabama
Missouri - Oklahoma, Arkansas, Texas A&M
Oklahoma - Texas, Missouri, Arkansas
South Carolina - Georgia
Tennessee - Alabama, Vanderbilt, Kentucky
Texas - Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Arkansas
Texas A&M - Texas, LSU, Missouri
Vanderbilt - Tennessee, Kentucky

Alabama-LSU is too big a game every year,.

 

[saturdaysarebet]

Guys, they’re not taking away the Bama-LSU game. We will have the toughest annual opponents.

That's what happens when you carry the SEC on your back for so long.

 

[saturdaysarebet]

great, just let us beat up each other and put less teams in the playoffs. Excellent move

The cream will rise to the top. Iron sharpens iron.